Politics is always a blend of manipulation and principles, sincerity and duplicity.
However, there can come a point at which all principles become subordinate to power (or to an agenda), when any appeal to honesty or truth or compassion is really just a veiled attempt to dominate an enemy or gain some influence. Both sides will accuse the other of this condition, of course. You can discern which side has completely abandoned its principles by identifying which side has abandoned the truth. When every message and argument is made in bad faith, and when every fact is twisted and decontextualized, then you’ve slid into duplicity. This kind of disingenuous messaging becomes transparent after a fairly short period. After that it might be compelling to those who agree with you, but to everyone who’s not a fellow partisan the lies will appear obvious, and the effort will seem bizarre.
The establishment left seems to have arrived at that point. ANY behavior or activity by their allies (state-sponsored propaganda, riots, ambushes of police, fraud and child labor) becomes defensible, and is defended. Any behavior by their opponents (legitimate and democratic law enforcement operations, efforts to reign in federal benefits fraud, parental pushes to restrict adult content in school libraries) becomes objectionable.
But, frankly, they’ve gone too far. Their disconnection from reality in these circumstances mean that, in the event, the activities they’re opposing aren’t just mistaken or disingenuous (according to their narratives), but evil. Everything is a crisis, an assault on democracy, a travesty. After dozens of crises (which have turned out to be remarkably untroublesome, for crises) the public is exasperated. What is one to do when someone tells you the same lie a dozen times, after it’s already been exposed? This isn’t communication, or persuasion, at this point. It’s a rote recitation of ideological mantras, to reassure the psychologically captive.
If you only paid attention to what they were saying (and about 30% of the population do - mostly older, richer, white people who watch cable news and read legacy media outlets) you might believe that American citizens were being grabbed at random, in secret, by masked police. Instead, illegal immigrants are being served with administrative warrants, as has happened for decades. Deportations are still running at below the rate of the Obama administration, and the few cases that the media has tried to make into controversies have turned out to feature people who are probably criminals and have no right to be in the country in any case.
If you listened to what they were saying you might believe that the American public is crying out in outrage, and that the judiciary is trembling under the threat of this anti-democratic regime. Instead, Trump is about as popular as ever (with Native Americans, and Hispanics, and working class people, and married women with children, etc.) and the judicial system is moving right along, save for a few messy instances of utopian justices who chose to put their commitment to radical ideology above their respect for American law in a desperate attempt to delay the Trump agenda.
If you listened to what they were saying you might believe that we would be falling into a recession by now, that inflation would be rising rapidly and that income inequality would be shooting upward. Instead, inflation is modest (far lower than it has been for much of the past 5 years), blue collar jobs and investment are both increasing, and the economy seems robust. It’s impossible to say how much any presidency really affects economic variables, but the Biden years were a godsend for bureaucrats, federal workers, academics, the unemployed, and non-profit employees (the electoral base of the modern Democratic party). The Trump years are turning out to be good for small business owners, blue collar workers, manufacturers, and investors.
A person would have to selectively ignore vast swathes of political circumstance, forget the dozens of failed predictions, suppress their memories of the policy disasters of the past 5 years, and focus exclusively on the risks and errors of the current administration. He or she would further have to exaggerate the seriousness of every small event and assume the darkest motivations of every actor in order to sustain the relentless narrative of ‘crisis!’ that churns through our media every day. But millions of people are capable of this kind of doublethink, apparently. When you consider that millions of people have blithely continued to maintain an air of complete certainty, after being wrong about BLM, federal spending, climate change, COVID policy, #MeToo, bail reform, border policy, teachers’ unions, etc., this all seems a little less surprising.
Unfortunately, duplicity and manipulation can only be corrected by applying honesty. The fact is that millions of voters and news-watchers no longer value honesty, even as a concept, because they truly believe that beating their opponents (winning arguments, holding power) is more important than remaining in contact with reality. When you internalize this kind of systemic deception for over a decade you become the modern progressive establishment. If truth and honor only matter when they aid your cause, then they don’t matter at all.
Women have also evolved to deny any hierarchy among ourselves. This may seem like a feminist innovation, but it’s an ancient behavior that feminism justified as morally superior to recognizing natural differences between women.
How does a woman compete while minimizing the risk of retaliation? I suggest that women use a few simple strategies. Strategy 1 is that a woman does not ever let anyone else know that she is competing with them. This is an ideal strategy, since if she can disguise her intentions, the risk of retaliation is reduced. She preaches the mantra of equality for all, and sincerely believes it. This sincerity allows her to be maximally convincing to other women. Unaware of her own competitive instincts, she tries to get as much as she can for herself, while insisting that everyone else share equally.9
Girls also learn early that outshining their friends can lead to ostracism:
…girls and women replied that they thought their closest friends would think poorly of them if they became more successful than their friends. They also added that any greater achievement by one friend might destroy the friendship. Even businesswomen know that they must present themselves as “dead even” to their female coworkers or else risk the end of the friendship.10
Women are, therefore, often hostile to meritorious competition. If one starts to outshine others, rumor mill justice will promptly begin, and her position will become untenable. A high-performing woman will be cut down before she can even compete with men at the highest levels.
A new paper argues that reducing the size of the human population would have close to zero effect on climate change. A baby born today will have a smaller carbon footprint than one born a decade or two ago, and their kids’ carbon footprints will be even smaller. As a result of population momentum, population numbers won’t decline for several generations - and by the time they do, people’s carbon footprints may be negligible anyway. The authors estimate that population reduction would lower global temperatures by only 0.05°C compared to population stabilization.
Our minds are overloaded. We are flooded with information that feels urgent, personal, and morally important, making it difficult to tell what truly matters. We lose sight of what is within our control and what belongs to someone else. Real problems blend with manufactured noise. We need to take back control of our minds by interrupting automatic emotional reactions and choosing how we respond.
It is not that people no longer care. It is that their empathy has been hijacked and spread thin across issues and individuals that feel endless and impossible to resolve. The result is emotional exhaustion, reactivity, and moral confusion. Some people shut down and detach. Others try to fix everything and lose themselves in the process.
The solution is not to harden your heart or stop caring. It is to unf*ck your thinking by recognising when your mind has been hijacked and learning to respond from a grounded, intentional place.
The heat map is Muslim population percentage. Red dots are grooming gang incidents. Almost perfect spatial correlation.
British occupation government trying to argue that the sexual abuse of little girls is not a racial issue. This excellent data analysis dismantles that vile deception.
Europe and particularly Germany have entered a totally new era when it comes to government interference with personal expression. We’ve never seen anything like this before, it is going to get a lot worse, and nobody anywhere has the slightest interest in dialling this back. The prosecutions are escalating and they will only become more pervasive and ridiculous.
What is happening resembles classic “totalitarian” political tactics only superficially. The DDR employed literal bureaucrats and secret policemen whose job it was to censor speech according to defined standards and to punish or intimidate those who said inconvenient things. An analogy would be the farmer who decides there are too many rabbits eating his cabbages, and so he goes out and shoots them.
Modern Germany just can’t go out and shoot rabbits, and the reason has nothing to do with liberal democratic freedoms. We can’t even build bridges. Over a century ago, the Kingdom of Saxony required only two or three years to build the first Carola Bridge over the Elbe in Dresden. The SS destroyed that monument in 1945 to slow the Soviet advance, but the DDR needed only four years to build a replacement – the one that finally collapsed in September of last year. Today, in the best Germany of all time, we will require at least ten years and almost certainly more to build our third Carola Bridge. That is a very rough scale of how much ability the state has lost in the space of just a few generations.
Women who became pregnant and gave birth in the GULAG were often not spared from their heavy work detail for long… meaning that they had to leave their very young children in the care of cruel and starving women, who were forced to care for dozens of infants. The children were beaten, neglected, and rarely survived. This is the account of one mother, visiting her 15-month old daughter:
On some of my visits I found bruises on her little body. I shall never forget how she grabbed my neck with her skinny hands and moaned, “Mama, want home!” She had not forgotten the bug-ridden slum where she first saw the light of day, and where she’d been with her mother all of the time…
Little Eleonora… soon realized that her pleas for “home” were in vain. She stopped reaching out for me when I visited her; she would turn away in silence. On the last day of her life, when I picked her up (they allowed me to breast-feed her) she stared wide-eyed somewhere off in the distance, then started to beat her weak little fists on my face, clawing at my breast and biting it. Then she pointed down at her bed.
In the evening, when I came back with my bundle of firewood, her cot was empty. I found her lying naked in the morgue among the corpses of the adult prisoners. She had spent one year and four months in this world and died on 3 March 1944… That is the story of how, in giving birth to my only child, I committed the worst crime there is.
There were three mothers there, and we were given a tiny room to ourselves in the barracks. Bedbugs poured down like sand from the ceiling and walls; we spent the whole night brushing them off the children. During the daytime we had to go out to work and leave the infants with any old woman who we could find who had been excused from work; these women would calmly help themselves to the food we had left for the children…
Every night for a whole year, I stood at my child’s cot, picking off the bedbugs and praying. I prayed that God would prolong my torment for a hundred years if it meant that I wouldn’t be parted from my daughter. I prayed that I might be released with her, even if only as a beggar or a cripple. I prayed that I might be able to raise her to adulthood, even if I had to grovel at people’s feet and beg for alms to do it. But God did not answer my prayer. My baby had barely started walking, I had hardly heard her first words, the wonderful heartwarming word “Mama,” when we were dressed in rags despite the winter chill, bundled into a freight car, and transferred to the “mothers’ camp.” And here my pudgy little angel with the golden curls soon turned into a pale ghost with blue shadows under her eyes and sores all over her lips.
[-Testimony of woman who gave birth in the GULAG…]
Behold, the fruits of socialism.
Bruno Bettelheim, writing about accounts made by young people of their release (usually at age 18). These were children born in Soviet prison camps, wrested from their mothers, and put in brutal and isolating ‘orphanages’:
Since they were written soon after the children had reached freedom and security, it would seem reasonable for them to have spoken of their hope for liberation, if they had any. The absence of such statements suggests that they had none. These children were robbed of the freedom to vent deep and normal feelings, forced to repress them in order to survive for barely another day. A child who has been deprived of any hope for the future is a child dwelling in hell…
Olga Adamova-Sliozberg found herself appointed… head of a women’s ditch-digging brigade composed mostly of political prisoners, all weakened by long jail sentences. When, after three days’ work, they had completed just 3 percent of the norm, she went to the norm-setter and begged for an easier assignment. Upon hearing that the weak brigade was mostly composed of former Party members, his face darkened.
“Oh, yes, former members of the Party are they? Now, if you’d been prostitutes, I’d have been happy to let you wash windows and do three times the norm. When those Party members in 1929 decided to punish me for being a kulak, threw me and my six children out of our home, I said to them, ‘What’ve the children ever done?’ and they told me, ‘That’s the Soviet law.’ So there you are, you can stick to your Soviet law and dig nine cubic meters of mud a day.”
The GULAG wasn’t just for adults (either regular criminals, or arbitrarily designated political “enemies”). Tens of thousands of infants and children were arrested and imprisoned as well, either children of adult prisoners or orphans or street children captured by the state.
The malotetki - “juveniles” - inspired little sympathy among their fellow inmates. “Hunger and the horror of what had happened had deprived them of all defenses,” wrote Lev Razgon, who observed that the juveniles gravitated naturally toward those who seemed the strongest. These were the professional criminals, who turned the boys into “servants, mute slaves, jesters, hostages, and everything else,” and both boys and girls into prostitutes. Their horrifying experiences failed to inspire much pity, however; on the contrary, some of the harshest invective in camp memoir literature is reserved for them. Razgon wrote that whatever their background, child prisoners soon “all displayed a frightening and incorrigibly vengeful cruelty, without restraint or responsibility”…
When you destroy the natural fabric of family and community, you push children towards psychopathy and antisocial personality disorders. In such settings these aren’t maladaptive - mercy and compassion and consideration are maladaptive. These are rational defense and survival mechanisms in a world where the threat of physical violence forever looms, and where parental love and adult support are unreliable or absent.
The effects of 20th-century federal government policies in the United States (which were well-meaning, just as Soviet policies were well-meaning) on certain poor American communities is similar. Destroy the family structure, introduce crime and brutality, and narrow the window of cultural aspiration and reflection, and you’ll be creating a generation of soulless children, most of whom will grow to become soulless adults. They will grow bigger (unless they die) and they will become smarter and tougher, but they will never acquire the capacity for social consideration or conscientiousness or general compassion. No amount of bureaucratic services and well-paid teachers and counselors will be able to fully reverse the damage, for the window will have closed. For many people (not all, but especially for many boys), the time to develop a soul is during childhood. After that, it’s too late.
Throughout the Gulag’s existence, the prisoners always reserved a place at the very bottom of the camp hierarchy for the dying - or rather, for the living dead. A whole sub-dialect of camp slang was invented to describe them. Sometimes, the dying were called fitili, or “wicks",” as in the wick of a candle, soon to be blown out… Most often they were called dokhodyagi, for the Russian verb dokhodit, “to reach” or “to attain,” a word usually translated as “goners.”
Put simply, the dokhodyagi were starving to death, and they suffered from the diseases of starvation and vitamin deficiency: scurvy, pellagra, various forms of diarrhea.
In the final stages of starvation, the dokhodyagi took on a bizarre and inhuman appearance, becoming the physical fulfillment of the dehumanizing rhetoric used by the state: in their dying days, enemies of the people ceased, in other words, to be people at all. They became demented, often ranting and raving for hours. Their skin was loose and dry. Their eyes had a strange gleam. They ate anything they could get their hands on - birds, dogs, garbage. They moved slowly, and could not control their bowels or their bladders, as a result of which they emitted a terrible odor.
“If God exists, let him punish mercilessly those who break others with hunger.” - Gustav Herling
Without a REAL legal regime (meaning laws and citizen protections, and non-ideological principles) a system degenerates into arbitrary brutality.
Ideology cannot replace the legacy of English common law. The state will simply identify more and more peaceful and productive people as ‘enemies’ and the abuses will proliferate.
There’s a huge difference between: ‘theft is illegal’ and ‘hate speech is illegal.’ One is constituted equally, to defend the property of citizens. The other exists to protect the security and prestige of the ruling regime. In practice, they are opposites.
By this time, the upper echelons of the Soviet elite had also begun to conduct a wider debate about Stalinist justice. In early 1954, Khrushchev had ordered, and received, a report detailing how many prisoners had been accused of counter-revolutionary crimes since 1921, as well as an account of how many were still imprisoned. The numbers were by definition incomplete, since they did not include the millions sent into exile, those unjustly accused of technically nonpolitical crimes, those tried in ordinary courts, and those never tried at all. Still, given that these figures represent numbers of people who had been killed or sent to prison for no reason at all, they are shockingly high. By the MVD’s own count, 3,777,380 people had been found “guilty” of fomenting counter-revolution… Of these, 2,369,220 had been sent to camps, 765,180 had been sent into exile, and 642,980 had been executed.
After Kruschchev’s secret speech, Aleksandr Fadeev, a committed Stalinist and much-feared literary bureaucrat, went on an alcoholic binge. While drunk, he confessed to a friend that as head of the Writers’ Union, he had sanctioned the arrests of many writers he knew to be innocent. Fadeev killed himself the following day. He allegedly left a one-sentence letter, addressed to the Central Committee: “The bullet fired was meant for Stalin’s policies, for Zhdanov’s aesthetics, for Lysenko’s genetics.”
The Soviet system was a vast structure of lies and brutality, which warped the souls of all participants.
People starved outside the camps almost as frequently as they starved within them. During the German blockade of Leningrad, bread rations fell to 4 ounces a day, which was not enough to survive on, and heating oil was unavailable, turning the far northern winter into a torment. People caught birds and rats, stole food from dying children, ate corpses, and committed murder to get hold of ration cards. “In their apartments people battled for life, like perishing polar explorers,” remembered one survivor.
Nor was Leningrad the only starving city. NKVD reports written in April 1945 describe famine and mass starvation right across central Asia, in Uzbekistan, Mongolia, and the Tartar Republic. Families of frontline soldiers, lacking their breadwinner, suffered the most. Famine hit Ukraine as well: as late as 1947, cases of cannibalism were still being reported. In all, the Soviet Union claimed to have lost twenty million of its citizens during the war. Between 1941 and 1945, the Gulag was not the Soviet Union’s only source of mass graves.
WW2 (or ‘the great patriotic war’) was an unusual situation, but the truth is that communist regimes have ALWAYS struggled to feed their people. Cuba and North Korea needed foreign aid to keep their people from starvation. Socialist Venezuela and revolutionary Cambodia both lost millions of people to hunger and lack. The USSR was receiving thousands of tons of grain shipments from the CAPITALIST West, starting in the 1970’s.
Equality and economic justice are persuasive concepts… but abstraction and emotion are both poor guides to policymaking. Human society is incredibly complex, and trying to impose artificial values and order upon it often leads to disaster.
If people understood this history they would flee from ‘socialism’ just as quickly (more, probably) as they do from ‘fascism.’
People everywhere tend to assume that others are more prejudiced than themselves: more racist, more sexist, more homophobic. In a sense, this is good news, because it suggests that we typically overestimate how prejudiced others are. Interestingly, the self-other difference in perceived prejudice is larger among students than non-students. This could mean that students are less prejudiced than non-students, that they have a lower opinion of other people - the bigoted plebs - or a bit of both.
Jun. 30th, 2025
Jul. 1st, 2025
Many young women are trapped in a cultural prison of extreme self-indulgence (“self care”, “validation”, “affirmation”, “empowerment”). A huge demographic focusing mainly or only on their own needs and priorities is a terrible burden for society.
Islamabad was 99% Pakistani in 1950, but today Pakistanis are a shrinking minority. The most popular boy’s name in the capital city is now Harry. Millions of Christian Brits are culturally enriching Pakistan by converting mosques into churches and opening non-halal fish and chip shops everywhere. No one knows where they get their money from, how they can afford to have so many children, and how much of it is sent back to Britain in remittances. British migrants are waving the Union Jack all over Islamabad during protests. Knife crime keeps rising, so the Laballah party is banning knives. Last summer, British and French Pakistanis rioted in the streets of Lahore and Karachi over a European football match. Both cities also have British mayors and segregated neighborhoods for French, German, and other European migrants who prefer to live amongst each other instead of assimilating.
…there’s widespread concern about the radicalization of young men, but far less about the parallel phenomenon in women. In some cases, in fact, women’s radicalization is explicitly encouraged by mainstream institutions.
Sometimes, mainstream institutions don’t just overlook female extremism—they actively encourage it.
The way young women organize their social lives compounds this vulnerability. Studies by developmental psychologist Joyce Benenson have found that female friend groups tend to be less resilient than those of males, and many women suffer from an intense fear of social exclusion. The pressure to “fit into” a group is stronger for girls than for boys, possibly leading girls to support beliefs or ideas out of a desire for social harmony rather than true conviction.
These dynamics create perfect conditions for availability cascades, a social phenomenon—described by Cass Sunstein and Timur Kuran in 2007—in which a group comes to hold a belief through chain reactions.
This represents a new form of radicalization that operates differently from its male counterpart. When ideology takes over female friendship groups, the process is less violent and more relational, driven by peer pressure, emotional reasoning, and fear of social exclusion. It thrives in spaces that appear safe and caring, but beneath the language of justice lies a brittle conformity.
The implications extend beyond individual well-being to institutional trust and social cohesion. When compassionate instincts become misdirected and the instinct for purity leads to coercion, the resulting absolutism becomes toxic.
The ‘elastic ideology’ is a game that progressives play. They desire to radically remake society and its relationships… but they’re constrained by electoral politics. They secretly support radical activists and non-profits with government money while publicly promoting notions like ‘empiricism’ and ‘norms’ and ‘common sense’, which they actually do not believe in.
"IQ is one of the most heritable psychological traits – that is, individual differences in IQ are strongly associated with individual differences in genes (at least in fairly typical modern environments)."
The modern brand of the Republican Party, at least in written doctrine, aligns with a Jeffersonian worldview. Jefferson famously said, “When we get piled upon one another in large cities, as in Europe, we shall become as corrupt as Europe.” Conservative Republicans especially value property rights, individual freedoms, and the beauty of being left alone. They don’t want government to handle everything.
The opposite is true in cities, where voters vote for the party that promises the most investment into shared resources, programs, and infrastructure – naturally the Democrats. While Republicans are wanting to save money and not waste it on large contracts, Democrats promote public spending to the moon. Think subways, Hawaiian trains to nowhere, metro bus transport systems, or anything else designed to ease the congestion found in cities which sounds good to the voters who think they’re getting it for free - or are getting it for free at your expense.
Recent stories include this one about a 25 year-old man of undisclosed background (who is almost certainly a migrant, otherwise authorities would not be so secretive about his origins) exposing himself to a bunch of underage teenagers at a pool in Asperg (Baden-Württemberg). Or this one, about a 21 year-old Syrian at a pool in Schweinfurt (Bavaria) caught exposing himself to four boys. Or this one, about men of “dark complexion” who severely beat an 18 year-old and threw him down some stairs. Or this disturbing one, about two Syrians who groped and assaulted a 12 year-old girl at a pool in Hof (Bavaria), forcing her beneath the water repeatedly and leaving her with a bloody nose.
…it’s nothing compared to the posters devised by a literal blue-haired city bureaucrat in Büren (near Paderborn), which take the woke programme so far around the bend that I had trouble believing they weren’t intended as subversive parodies. In the anti-groping category, Büren provides this insane PSA of a fat red-haired woman molesting a diminutive black man with a prosthetic leg, while a bizarre sea turtle named Tiki lurks beneath them and deplores unwanted touching.
Because the twisted moral hierarchy of the Soviet camp system decreed the “socially close” - not just the professional criminals, but the ordinary thieves, swindlers, murderers, and rapists - more capable of being reformed into good Soviet citizens, they were automatically more likely to receive trusty status. And in a certain sense, the thieves, who had no fear of suing brutality, made ideal trusties.
-Gulag, by Anne Applebaum
We see a kind of pale reflection of this in the modern two-tier justice scheme in the West: people who rob stores and molest children are of less policymaking and punitive concern than wrong-thinkers. People who routinely vandalize property or break into cars will be processed and released… whereas a suspect online poster will be greeted by a team of six police, who take their function very seriously.
This isn’t a malicious conspiracy - it’s merely a reflection of political priorities. More than keeping people safe and orderly, the government wants to suppress certain ideas and expressions.
Let’s assume that the shoe requirement costs one minute of time per passenger. That’s actually conservative, because you have to count not only the time required to remove your own shoes, but also:
all the delays forgetful people impose on everyone behind them in line
all the delays TSA imposes on everyone when they enforce the rule on the forgetful. (How many times have you seen a person get up to the scanner, then get turned around to put their shoes on the belt?)
The average number of air travelers in the US over this period is about 700M per year, implying the destruction of roughly 15 billion minutes of time in the U.S. alone. That’s almost 30,000 years of life. If you figure the average American has about 30 more years to live, that’s 1000 lives destroyed. The cost? One lifetime in prison for Richard Reid.
There’s a long and not-obscure history of policing as symbol performance and the use of federal agents as narrative instruments, and it’s the last thing that MacArthur Park needs. I went there on the night of the raids, and the day after, and the park and surrounding neighborhoods went right back to being filthy and dangerous. The Trump administration sent a message and then…left. If you oppose Trump, this is your opening. Here it is. Easy shot.
The reason no one is taking the shot in any meaningful way is that the moment requires critics to start from reality. MacArthur Park is dirty, dangerous, violent, a site of ruin and despair, a place of death — the coroner was hauling the body of a young man out of the MacArthur Park light rail station yesterday, while I was there — and a symbol of failure. Now, here’s the New York Times, explaining what happened:
Yes, MacArthur Park, a quiet neighborhood hub where gentle immigrant children play happily in an atmosphere of peace and tranquility. And then suddenly, armed men on the march!
…
…read the replies, which are radioactive with well-informed hostility.
“Romantic love is not an invention of Western culture. Instead, the idea that romantic love is an invention of Western culture is itself an invention of Western culture, and a rather implausible one at that.”
…government intervention tends to take the form of “subsidize demand, restrict supply.” For example, in housing, there are many programs to encourage home ownership. But there are many local regulations that restrict home building. In health care, there are many ways that government provides or subsidizes the provision of coverage for medical procedures. Yet it also imposes licensing requirements that restrict the supply. In higher education, government grants and loans subsidize demand. But accreditation rules restrict supply.
From the perspective of naive economics and the theory of market failure, a policy of subsidizing demand and restricting supply is incoherent. Subsidizing demand makes sense when the market failure leads to under-provision of a good. Restricting supply makes sense when market failure leads to over-provision of a good. Doing both is self-contradictory.
From the perspective of naive economics, government intervention is justifiable, because there are market failures. From the perspective of political realism, government intervention is undesirable, because it is guided by special interests. Real-world interventions often do not address market failures in a coherent way.
By enforcing federal law? The real question is: what could Trump do that would NOT arouse the criticism and enmity of L.A. progressives? I think the answer is: NOTHING.
Their worldview is now anchored in such a way that anything he does is ‘bad’, even if it leads to law & order, economic renaissance, and rousing popularity with the working classes.
The communist regimes of the twentieth century tried to erase the advantages of the elites - and in the process, accidentally demonstrated the stubborn persistence of human capital.
I really appreciate the sheer breadth of concepts you bring together in posts like this. I plan to explore the Islam in the west thing soon, and it may even be more radioactive than my stuff on women.
I am a researcher at a University and witnessed a number of atrocious things happening in academic research and reacted with a WTF is going on, I need to understand what is causing this, the particular contours of the modern world's civilizational dysfunction. Your writing is very astute as far as describing and highlighting the most poignant and exemplary cases, as well as a well reasoned narrative on all of the improper incentives that are systemic in the modern day and causing decay and suffering.
I really appreciate the sheer breadth of concepts you bring together in posts like this. I plan to explore the Islam in the west thing soon, and it may even be more radioactive than my stuff on women.
Nice collection!
I am a researcher at a University and witnessed a number of atrocious things happening in academic research and reacted with a WTF is going on, I need to understand what is causing this, the particular contours of the modern world's civilizational dysfunction. Your writing is very astute as far as describing and highlighting the most poignant and exemplary cases, as well as a well reasoned narrative on all of the improper incentives that are systemic in the modern day and causing decay and suffering.